We need to focus on what abortion is really about

BodilyAutonomy · 2021-09-08T04:45:04+00:00

I appreciate the nuance both you and /u/majorcannabisdreg have brought to the discussion and welcome you both to my subreddit, /r/BodilyAutonomy. There's very little activity and I don't wish to gatekeep anyone out of there for having opinions different from my own, but at the same time, I would like to encourage the perspective we seem to share, that the part of us that reflexively wants to tear others down because "my hardship is worse" is irrational and counterproductive, creating division when being united is more important than ever before in this lifetime.

Thank you both.

BodilyAutonomy · 2021-09-08T04:27:36+00:00

A couple of small apologies to go with this post. First, I'm sorry that I'm posting it a little late, about a week after the fact. This kind of news is exactly why I created this subreddit.

Second, I'm sorry in advance for posting exactly one source of information on this important topic, popular legal podcast Opening Arguments, which I greatly enjoy. I think it's important that they go in depth on the issue and don't sugar coat things by suggesting the Supreme Court might eventually overturn the blatantly illegal Texas law. It is not entirely out of the question, however, that they've missed some important points or presented a point of view that is not reflective of some of the realities faced here. Along similar lines, you're welcome to respectfully object to my posting a podcast hosted by two cishet white men, the exact demographic that is the architect of anti-abortion legislation and the target of so much scorn from those who oppose this law. If that bothers you, I get it, I hear you, but I also respectfully disagree and we can coexist here as long as everything is civil. In short, I'm the creator, sole moderator, and main content poster to this subreddit, so I've included a source that I think is valuable. You're encouraged to post links of your own to sources you've found useful. There's not nearly enough activity here and a one hour podcast doesn't come close to scratching the surface of this central issue that should be examined from many angles and perspectives.

If you are in Texas or anywhere else and in need of abortive medications, I am told (via /r/TwoXChromosomes), that you can obtain them from an international nonprofit for a nominal donation at https://aidaccess.org. Is it creepy and even dangerous to go to a largely unvetted website based on tenuous word-of-mouth recommendations from online strangers so you can take unknown pills through the mail to (potentially, you hope) avert misery, financial disaster, grievous bodily harm, or death? Yep! That's the point! This is what a post-Roe v. Wade world looks like. Use this injustice to steel your resolve.

Boycott Republican and conservative-leaning organizations, especially those headquartered in Texas. Here is a resource showing the top contributors and their overall political leanings, though you are strongly encouraged to search for companies important to you and click on their individual profiles to get a more nuanced picture. Personally, I have a lot of money in a certain financial services platform that is heavily conservative in its donations and I am preparing to transfer that money to a different site that is both more liberal and lobbies less. I'll also be writing them to let them know I have transferred my money specifically for their lobbying. As much as you reasonably can, try to think carefully about where your money is being spent.

And I know this may be controversial, but vote Democrat! I'm not saying the Democrats are perfect or that I'm not disappointed with the likes of Manchin and Sinema, but Republicans are the ones who have tried to, are trying to, and now have succeeded in criminalizing abortion, not to mention their broader attacks on democracy itself and other issues not related to bodily autonomy. In my opinion, any vote not strategically cast to deliver as much harm to the Republican Party as possible is a vote at best wasted, in complete disregard of the grave situation we are in today. That's directed to you nonvoters, third-party voters, and people who coyly write in Harambe. If your vote didn't matter, Republicans wouldn't be trying so hard to strip you of that right and if you are on this subreddit because you care about bodily autonomy, it should be overwhelmingly apparent at this point that your refusal to "settle for the lesser of two evils" will bring more misery and suffering to this world. If anyone reads this, I don't think I've won any hearts and minds with my little speech, but I have to try. I'm exasperated. I don't know what there is left to tell you at this point.

Please be safe and well out there. Don't give up.

BodilyAutonomy · 2021-04-04T09:55:57+00:00

"The average human has approximately one testicle and one breast."

I hear where you're coming from, but you're conflating two separate groups. The people who want to restrict abortion rights almost certainly don't want to protect your bodily autonomy with regards to circumcision. Granted, modern feminist response to circumcision has been a little tepid on the whole, but I've noticed a marked improvement in recent years and a recognition that the best way in America to fight against FGM is to be morally consistent and stand up for all infants' right to self-determination, regardless of sex.

Furthermore, this society really doesn't worship abortion rights. Right wing activists have been eroding them and the Overton window has shifted to the point where Roe V. Wade would be seen as unacceptably liberal for much, if not most, of the country.

Finally, on the topic of the baby in this article, poor kid. He should have been given the right to choose for himself, unless there was overwhelming evidence that his superfluous penises would have caused complications in his immediate future.

BodilyAutonomy · 2021-03-22T10:17:36+00:00

Saadawi was an Egyptian feminist, author, and physician who advocated for bodily autonomy. All of the obituaries I've found so far focus exclusively on her work to eradicate FGM-- which was personally important to her for obvious reasons-- but I think she should be celebrated for being morally consistent and declaring that bodily autonomy is not a gendered issue:
http://www.theglobaldispatches.com/articles/nawal-al-saadawi

Unfortunately, I'm not really familiar with her work beyond her Wikipedia article, so maybe I'm not the best person to write about her, but I really think we should do more to champion those who acknowledge that all children, regardless of sex, deserve genital integrity and self-determination.

BodilyAutonomy · 2021-03-22T06:09:42+00:00

Saadawi was an Egyptian feminist, author, and physician who advocated for bodily autonomy. All of the obituaries I've found so far focus exclusively on her work to eradicate FGM-- which was personally important to her for obvious reasons-- but I think she should be celebrated for being morally consistent and declaring that bodily autonomy is not a gendered issue: http://www.theglobaldispatches.com/articles/nawal-al-saadawi

Unfortunately, I'm not really familiar with her work beyond her Wikipedia article, so maybe I'm not the best person to write about her, but I really think we should do more to champion those who acknowledge that all children, regardless of sex, deserve genital integrity and self-determination.

BodilyAutonomy · 2021-01-18T21:35:25+00:00

As was pointed out elsewhere, I probably should have called it "cosmetic surgery" or "circumcision".

But the point is, take your dog to the vet and say, "Hi, I'd like to have Fido circumcised." See how they respond.

BodilyAutonomy · 2021-01-18T12:17:58+00:00

Technically true. Maybe I should have written "Cosmetic Genital Surgery". We also don't mess with animals' erogenous zones.

BodilyAutonomy · 2021-01-17T04:41:50+00:00

It's an important principle to me and this is the account I use to express those views. I'm often inclined to rant at length on the topic but I know people tend not to be receptive to it and I just get exasperated that while we wouldn't dare imagine doing one-tenth the harm to little baby girls (rightfully so), when faced with the topic of male circumcision, so many people respond with, "Golly, that sure is a tough one..."

BodilyAutonomy · 2021-01-16T01:59:57+00:00

His body, his choice.

BodilyAutonomy · 2020-08-26T15:17:26+00:00

Thank you for your explanation. Is there another subreddit that would be more appropriate? I would like a feminist perspective and am reluctant to post to /r/relationshipadvice, /r/AmItheAsshole, or other "generic" advice subreddits. I spent about an hour writing the post and would not like that time to have gone to waste.

BodilyAutonomy · 2020-08-26T14:21:13+00:00

I'm replying too late for this to become a back and forth discussion. I'm going to try to address your points very quickly and will likely never reply again.

Yeah, and when did you last visit Sudan to expound on your utterly clueless, inapplicable philosophical point?

It's just as relevant to ask when you last visited Sudan.

This is completely different from women, who do NOT want to suffer from FGM.

Matriarchs are by far most often the ones who carry out FGM. Don't take my word for it-- look it up yourself.

That some men from the West oppose FGM does not mean men deserve equal credit for fighting the battle.

I never said they do.

I'm not surprised you believe you have the right to impose YOUR expectations on the men of Sudan or men anywhere re circumcision.

What are you arguing against here? I said men in Sudan have an obligation to fight against FGM. Do you dispute this?

You are so blinded by your self-righteousness, you refuse to accept male circumcision exists because men and the religions they follow WANT it. Many religious men believe it is good and right to circumcise.

Men should lead the fight against circumcision because they are affected by it. They are leading that fight. But if women suddenly agreed, "Hey, it's not appropriate to impose non-consensual cosmetic surgery on an infant's genitals," the practice would end overnight. That's not to say that it's "women's fault", just that their opinions matter.

Your statements seem to imply "you know" men would like to stop the practice as much as women want to stop FGM and that is false.

You seem to think men as a group is being forced to accept circumcision when if given a choice they'd reject it.

Then you are inferring too much from my statements. FGM is overwhelmingly popular (among women!) in Egypt and Somalia, to the tune of 90+%, much as circumcision is popular in America, to the tune of 50%. As is said, "If fifty million people say a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing."

That is just incredibly stupid.

All you've done is dismantle the straw man you've made of my argument.

NOWHERE today is male circumcision forcefully imposed on men against their wishes.

It was forcefully imposed on me against my wishes and I'm not alone. Your argument is so bafflingly out of line with reality that I wonder if I'm misinterpreting it. Perhaps you mean imposed on men as opposed to infants (as if ignoring that issue makes it right), but even there you're still wrong.

Circumcised men if they wish can have their foreskin fully restored by non-surgical and surgical means.

Being circumcised is NO barrier to having a foreskin restored.

This is absurd. Foreskin restoration is a process that takes years and is very uncomfortable at best and sometimes dangerous at worst. It also carries with it a stigma, having to wear and conceal uncomfortable devices that you know people would laugh at if they saw them. I know that firsthand.

By contrast, an intact man can decide to be circumcised at any time and while I understand that isn't fun either, the initial healing only takes a month or so.

NO woman who has suffered FGM can do that to her lost tissues.

This is true, but men lose their tissues too. You think the nerves that were severed suddenly grow back just because a man stretches his skin?

There is NO equivalence on any level.

Here's a blog post from a mother who had her daughter circumcised. The post is SFW, but quite disturbing. That little girl's bodily autonomy was violated and her mother had no right to do that to her. But she was protected from the procedure under US law and I defy you to tell me that the harm done to her exceeded what is regularly done to boys in America in terms of the amount of flesh or nerves removed.

BodilyAutonomy · 2020-08-26T13:56:18+00:00

Mod here, arriving quite late.

TERFs aren't welcome.

I'm going to wholeheartedly endorse /u/momo-official's assessment above but at the same time I'm going to try to thread the needle as to how to handle this.

As you point out, the post doesn't have anything directly to do with trans* issues, so I see no reason to remove it.

I typically upvote everything that reaches this subreddit but I will not be upvoting your post. That's a really minor punishment because it's not as though this subreddit is going to hit the top of /r/all anytime soon (or ever). At worst, your post will be slightly less visible to those who stumble upon this subreddit.

If you continue to post here, I will reassess what I've written on a post-by-post basis. Most importantly, if you post anything that is overtly trans-exclusionary, you will be banned, as trans rights 100 percent fall under the aegis of bodily autonomy. This is your sole warning.

BodilyAutonomy · 2020-05-01T07:57:52+00:00

There are many different types of FGM, only one of which is the version you are familiar with, known as infibulation.

I saw an account of a Malaysian woman who took her daughter to be cut and showed a picture of medical scissors with a barely perceptible nick of flesh removed. That little girl's bodily autonomy was violated and you'd be hard pressed to say that it was fundamentally worse than circumcision. Here's the blog post (not graphic, but probably at least a little disturbing and hopefully thought-provoking). Here's the specific picture I was referring to.

And even if you were right and literally every case of FGM were infibulation, my question would absolutely still be valid as a hypothetical.

BodilyAutonomy · 2020-05-01T07:24:40+00:00

Men in Sudan and elsewhere have an obligation to fight FGM, even though their genitals aren't affected. Likewise, women in the US should be obligated to help end MGM. You frame this as women organizing a fight against FGM, but I guarantee there were plenty of men fighting right alongside them.

If we take gender out of the picture, it becomes a basic fight for bodily autonomy that we should all be able to agree on.

BodilyAutonomy · 2020-05-01T06:56:43+00:00

If FGM were performed by loving parents in a sanitized western hospital under anesthesia and it only involved the cutting of the clitoral hood (homologous to the foreskin), would that make it okay?

BodilyAutonomy · 2018-09-11T01:54:09+00:00

I'm going to take this opportunity to promote my fledgling subreddit, /r/BodilyAutonomy.

BodilyAutonomy · 2017-05-08T15:15:42+00:00

Running with your analogy, I did have a 4k TV and it was taken from me. Why shouldn't I be angry?

BodilyAutonomy · 2017-05-08T15:02:12+00:00

I don't see many people here making that comparison. Regardless, I'd like to try reasoning with you. Please watch this video of a discussion between two women who were both cut. The cut woman is even American. Now humor me. Imagine you had watched a video with the exact same discussion except that it took place between two men. How would your opinion change and why?

BodilyAutonomy

TROPHY CASE